Can anyone explain why the numbers that the game uses to calculate the length and mass of trains in some cases agree with the numbers written on the skins of the vehicles and in some do not? Attached are three screens showing this for three single locomotives:
WRT to length measures, the upper DB measurement is overall length over the couplers. DTG's figure (based on the collision box of the loco or car) measures over the bumpers at maximum depression. Weight: the bottom one is fine; DB don't paint fractional tons, so "83" is 82.5 rounded up. I can't really explain the discrepancy wrt to the 363 (261), except to observe that it's a heritage locomotive wearing vintage but unofficial DBB livery, with its "real" numbers unobtrusively on the frame. There may be a difference between its actual weight and the possibly historic weight number on the side. At a guess, the museum might have removed some of the pig-iron ballast added back in the day to make it a heavyweight V 61.
The length numbers printed are buffer to buffer. I don't think this is how the length is measured in the game/briefing window. Regarding the mass it could be an actual physics error or it could be that the physics was based on a different model, *or* it could mean that the printed weight is rounded. For example the BR143 is stated to weight 82.8t in many sources, but it is not uncommon for locomotives to vary slightly in weight due to differing equipment.
Correct, my bad. But that is over the buffers in their rest (extended) position. (for the US it's length over couplers, since buffers aren't an American thing)
Gotcha. I think you're right about how TSW measures the distance. Otherwise it would mean that basically every locomotive is almost 2 meters too long. Probably not too likely
Thank you for the answers. Does that mean that on the BR 112.1/143 the buffers get depressed for almost one meter on each side when coupling cars? Or do the "gaps" between the collision boxes of the vehicles just not get factored into the train length that the game shows you on the pause screen?
Interesting point! While the weight can actually correlate to real data, as the V60 had two weight variants build, one just below 50t and one with a strengthened body frame, which was around 53t. Obviously the visual model here does not fit the physical model, however, it can somehow be explained, by adding some tolerances, rounding, etc, as already suggested by cwf.green . the length, however, does not make sense. I have only the figures for the 143 (and I believe the 112 is identical in this respect), but 14,7m would actually be smaller the the loco frame itself, which is 15,4m long. Maybe someone copied the wrong numbers?
The original V60 was 48 tons as built. Some later had 6 tons of ballast added, called at first the V 60(s) and after 1968 the BR 261. The frame was identical, they were just loaded up.
In the original post it shows the length written on the side and the length given by the game (last picture).
Yes, I believe the lighter one became the 260 and the heavier one the 261. However, to my knowledge the frame was reinforced with the 261, no?! Wasn’t that the reason why the 260 had to be refurbished, as the frame proved to weak?
The 260 to the best of my knowledge was the original (leicht) V 60, just renumbered as part of the new computer system. These remained unchanged, even after their Kleinlok reclassification as 360s, until they were re-engined and became 362s. AFAIK, the frames were never altered. If the V 60(s)/261/361/363 had its frame reinforced when it was ballasted, I'm unaware of it.
Found this Wiki article in german: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/DB-Baureihe_V_60 It seems to suggest that the higher weight is indeed coming only from the reinforced frame and that, in addition, it could carry up to 6 tonnes of ballast, for heavy duty. On the other hand, it gives no good references, so I am not sure how true this is. It also explains a little bit about the changes made to the 260 and you were right, according to this article the frames were not altered, but other changes were made, in order to counteract the weak frames. Again, the reference can not be checked, hence, all not for certain.
Interesting discussion, I had assumed (without being able to read German) that the short measurements were the centre of each body jack point to the next body jack point for lifting the locomotive. Interesting that they are too short a measurements from buffer to buffer. I know on our railway we measure from coupler to coupler. The purpose of the measurement for us is to calculate occupancy lengths for platforms and sidings to avoid fouling adjacent tracks where they join at points. The measurement is "generous" because couplers can be stretched or compressed depending on where the set is and how it was put there.
The lower distance is actually the measurement between the bogie pivot points. The bigger one is the measurement over the buffers, where as the buffers are not compressed. If you have a central buffer coupling the length can also be expressed over this distance, as you usually would not find buffer on these trains.
You are talking about the lower number written on the side of the locomotive (between the inward pointing arrows), not the lower number shown by the game on the pause screen, right?
That would be important for time table planners and locomotive allocation but I can't imagine the driver being expected to know if their locomotive can get through the route except perhaps through the Working Time Table listing which locomotives are allowed on which routes. On our preserved railway for example, we have 2-6-2 steam engines 2-6-0+0-6-2 Garrats and assorted diesels. The diesels are mainline locomotives regauged to 2'6" and are much bigger (taller and wider) than everything else on the railway. The WTT gives the tonnages each locomotive is expected to haul in which sections and Local Instructions show where each class of locomotives are and are not allowed to go because they won't fit.
